Andy the Actuary

Perhaps it would help if we could ask, "What's the difference?" In particular, would this employee have become vested? In any event, you have no choice but to follow the Plan until such time where IRS says provision doesn't fly. Consequently, the employee is excluded and should not be considered in the 430 valuation. You also might want to verify that Plan satisfies 410(b) and 401(a)(26) with this employee excluded.

Wow! Even in those thrilling days of yesteryear, employers treated their employees like, ahhhhhhhhhhh, horses's assess.

And Aaron Chwatt was who? (Ho, Ho. Ho, Ho. Hee, Hee. Hee Hee. Ha, Ha. Ha, Ha)

Good try. However, Scout was the offspring of the stallion Mendel and mare Hadassah. Scout's given name was Menachin. Surprisingly, the name didn't play well except in the shtetl so producers changed named to Scout (derived from Menachin having once horsed around on Arthur Godfrey's Talent Scouts). And you can look this up provided you can find somewhere to look it up.

If person had terminated employment on day before transferring from "A" to "B," how would benefit have been determined? Then, would suspect plan might have a non-duplication of benefits clause that would give you your answer.

Thank you, Mr. C

An over-funded not-for-profit plan will undergo a spinoff-termination to capture excess plan assets. The sponsor understands that only so much of the assets must be legally transferred to the spunoff plan (for actives). Suppose the sponsor wants to study transferring more than the minimum requirement. Since transferring more than minimum requirement can be construed as benefiting the participants, is it justifiable for the cost of this study to be paid by the plan rather than the plan sponsor?

As a nonsequitor aside, the name of the actor who portrayed Tonto, while billed as Jay Silverheels, was actually Harold J. Smith -- and you can look it up!

In reflection, I concluded that Lone Ranger and Tonto had to have had a lot of down time. So, the question is why didn't TLR spend some of that time learnin' Tonto better grammar?

Understand your comment but he was obviously a well-rounded baby.

Just noticed that American playwright and screenwriter Horton Foote Jr was born on 3/14/16.

Generally, the math will have the funded percentage increase after a lump sum distribution, so long as LS < (1+x) x PV, Where A=Assets; FT=Funding Target; LS=Lump Sum; PV=Amount of PV included in FT; A/FT=(1+x) E.g. A=1,000,000; FT=800,000 ==> x=.25. So, if LS < 1.25 PV, funded percentage will increase. LS=100,000, PV=90,000 (1,000,000-100,000)/(800,000-90,000)=1.268 In short, in your case, it might not matter depending upon X and relationship of LS to PV. Otherwise, agree with Effen. ============================================================================= A/FT=1+X==>A=(1+X) FT==> A-LS=(1+X) FT - LS = (1+X) FT - (1+X) PV + (1+X) PV - LS ==> (A-LS)/(FT-PV) = (1+X) + [(1+X) PV - LS]/(FT - PV) > 1+X so long as (1+X) PV - LS >0

First time anyone's ever thanked me for having a bad attitude!

"Somebody get a sponge" - Larry David

Scanned? If that is the reasoning, then why not submit a PDF? Shhhhhhhhh. Your suggestion might cause a leapfrog to filing electronically. Then, we'll have to take a Wasserman test, give a DNA sample, and obtain a PIN which will cost $73.69.

I receive a postcard today from the State of Missouri. They indicated that the MO. 1099-G (reporting income tax refund) would no longer be mailed out but you can obtain it on-line at their website. No problem. However, no doubt if they don't mail out a reminder postcard each year this all will be forgotten. Unlike this sentence, I believe the postcard from MO was prepared with an Arial rather than Courier font.

Now that's a suggestion I can live with!

You will note the same issue on Schedule H for large plans. If you don't clear out and mark the 5500 final, you'll get an error. If you list as a transfer out but don't identify transferee plan, you'll get an error. If you list as expense, which it is not, the size may raise a flag. If plan is covered under Title IV and you list as a benefit distribution, you may have problems later because the PBGC 501 will not agree with the 5500-SF. If it were my plan and I was unable to obtain an answer from the IRS, I would subcontract out the preparation of the form. In absence of any guidance, I would report as "other income." It's beyond belief that your question is not addressed on the form or in the instructions. But it appears it hasn't.

Thank you all for your help. I've decided to drink a vial of soldering acid rather than continue to deal with meaningless federal rules and regulations. The camel's back straw was when the IRS announced its new user fees. From ASPPA: CAUTION: Beginning February 1, 2011, the IRS requires that a Courier 10 point font only is to be used when preparing an application[e.g., 5300]. Wonder what happens if you script, bold it, or type in all upper case?

So, since two people read your request in different ways, would you please elaborate on your question.

Let's see, it sounds as if you want to deduct the entire contribution in 2009 but claim $250K on the 2009 SB and $50K on the 2010 SB. My recollection is the IRS has opined that the deduction cannot be tied to an earlier year than the year of the Schedule SB on which the contribution was claimed. There were some posts on this topic a year or two ago and maybe even a gray book question. If you believe this, then the answer is "no" in respect of the $50K. Since the deduction was already taken, this would mean you would report $300K on the 2009 SB. Hopefully, some reader with a clearer memory can clarify or refute.

I just did a discount rate analysis for a non profit organization that pays lump sums and purchases annuities for retirees (does not pay monthly benefits from plan) and came up with 5.1%. Analysis was based on Citigroup 12/31/10 Pension Discount Rate Curve. Rates are very low in the short term. Interesting. Now, if the Plan did not pay lump sums, you would use a higher discount rate. But you have determined the rate that liabilities can be effectively settled, so why is it appropriate to use a higher rate? And we open the envelope and find the answer written, "I dunno."

With attorney agreement, have put such provision into several professional plans. The attorneys have not yet applied for d-letters but no problems anticipated.

So, a check with a date of April 1, 2011 that is mailed by the bank on April 2 would be in violation? If a Plan makes payment as of the end of the month, then would your explanation mean that a check dated April 30 that is mailed March 31 is okay? If not, then the Plan would need to have the pension start March 31 and mail the check prior to this date. Under IRS rules the check is deemed received on the date it mailed/postmarked at the PO, the same as a tax return is deemed filed on the date is mailed/postmarked. It will also be received on the date is sent electronically. If the check dated April 1 is mailed on April 2 it will be a timely MRD if April 1 is a Sunday. I dont understand why a plan would send a post dated check that could not be cashed for 30 days, since the check would be taxable in 2011 regardless of when it is cashed. The IRS rules deem the check to be received on the date is is mailed out, subject of course, to collection of the funds by the participant. I dont know whether a post dated check would be legal under the banking laws. Why cant the plan mail the check for the MRD due April 1 on the last business day in March like any normal business? I thank you for your help. My example is for when a play document specifies payment to be made at month end rather than as of the beginning of the month. I suspect in this case starting the pension as of March 31 would be the appropriate course.

So, a check with a date of April 1, 2011 that is mailed by the bank on April 2 would be in violation? If a Plan makes payment as of the end of the month, then would your explanation mean that a check dated April 30 that is mailed March 31 is okay? If not, then the Plan would need to have the pension start March 31 and mail the check prior to this date.